How will you vote on the April 5 Earnings Tax vote?

[FangKC]

This 5 year renewal is annoying. We should work now for viable alternatives given this will probably eventually fail.

I read in some article that if the earning tax was renewed in both cities, that some representative in Jeff City planned to introduce a measure to only have to vote for renewal every 20 years instead of 5 years.

[shinatoo]

I read in some article that if the earning tax was renewed in both cities, that some representative in Jeff City planned to introduce a measure to only have to vote for renewal every 20 years instead of 5 years.

Personally I think all tax measures should require a vote on some sort of cycle. 

[kcexpress]

Not a big turnout.  I guess most people didn't give a rats ass one way or another!!

[FangKC]

Channel 9 said the turnout was actually larger than the mayor and council election.

[shaffe]

I'm really glad it passed.  But I think it would be very wise and prudent for Sly to come up with a plan to, over a 10 or 15 year period, lessen the extent that KCMO relies on the e-tax. If it got shot down today I think KCMO would have been in a world of hurt with no real plan on how exactly to go about phasing it out over 10 years, but if we can lessen the weight on the crutch then if(when?) it ultimately gets voted down it won't be so crushing.

I'd actually almost prefer that happens, so that this stupid 5 year thing becomes a non-issue by (gasp!) some foresight by city leadership.

[mean]

It's more like you're now responsible for maintaining a pool you can't afford because your neighbors who used to chip in on it bailed on you but still want to use the pool anyway. 

What it comes down to for me is that KCMO essentially had a bunch of shit it found itself unable to pay for after people "escaped" to the suburbs, and instead of scaling back services or asking its residents to buck up and pay the difference to keep things rolling, KC (and lots of other cities) punitively targeted the people who bailed. I don't know what, if any, serious measures the city took to try and retain residents during "white flight". It seems, if anything, like the city was resigned to bleeding most of its residents into the suburbs but thought it could survive in the long term by positioning itself as the uncontested business / job center. In this context, the e-tax kinda makes sense; unfortunately, the city was wrong--the suburbs ended up competing very successfully for jobs as well as residents. Oops!

The e-tax is a symbol of failure. Failure to retain residents, and now failure to retain jobs. The city failed, and the e-tax is a stopgap. Fine, but how about we finally get around to fixing the problems that caused the damn thing to be necessary in the first place?

[aknowledgeableperson]

But I think it would be very wise and prudent for Sly to come up with a plan to, over a 10 or 15 year period, lessen the extent that KCMO relies on the e-tax.

Very good statement.  Of course, in the past that is what was said about the property tax and so now we have a tax (E-tax) that brings in approximately 150% more than the property tax.

[KCMax]

I'm really glad it passed.  But I think it would be very wise and prudent for Sly to come up with a plan to, over a 10 or 15 year period, lessen the extent that KCMO relies on the e-tax. If it got shot down today I think KCMO would have been in a world of hurt with no real plan on how exactly to go about phasing it out over 10 years, but if we can lessen the weight on the crutch then if(when?) it ultimately gets voted down it won't be so crushing.

I'd actually almost prefer that happens, so that this stupid 5 year thing becomes a non-issue by (gasp!) some foresight by city leadership.

Until the Tea Party pushes to repeal that revenue source as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

[WSPanic]

The 40 voters on this site voted 77.5% Yes - The KC electorate voted 77.5% yes.

Damn, we're good.

[KCPowercat]

We are a microcosm of kcmo

[chingon]

It says alot about the inanity and misdirected spite of Teabags that they funded and supported and voted against a flat tax, the very tax system so many of them advocate for.

[bobbyhawks]

The e-tax is a symbol of failure. Failure to retain residents, and now failure to retain jobs. The city failed, and the e-tax is a stopgap. Fine, but how about we finally get around to fixing the problems that caused the damn thing to be necessary in the first place?

Schools?  Crime?  Demographics?  Only two of those can be "fixed," and everyone is obviously in support of making the schools better and lowering crime rates, but those cost money.  The e-tax in KC is not a symbol of failure, but rather a symbol of the fact that, like it or not, KCMO is still the center of the city.  Everything that makes this city a "major" metropolitan area is based in KCMO.  Take away KCMO, and we are a minor league town (zero way Sporting KC would be here without Lamar Hunt).  Take away KCMO, and we have no world renowned art galleries.  Take away KCMO, and we have no world class arena.  Take away KCMO, and we are not known for boulevards and fountains.  Take away KCMO, etc., etc., etc. 

When I lived in Kansas and worked in KCMO, I was able to deduct the percentage of days I spent outside the city from my taxes.  So, is it really too much to ask (only those people who actually work in KCMO) to give 1% of one's salary to the city that provides all the services that make the job possible in the first place, and to only give that for the number of days they were actually in the city?  You are able to move to and work in any city or state you wish.  And somehow people who love the Chiefs, Royals, the Nelson, downtown, two airports, the Plaza, etc., feel they have the right to tell us how to tax.  If they feel persecuted due to 1% in taxes, if they even have to pay them, then they are perfectly welcome to boycott the city.

If the e-tax is a symbol of failure and a stop-gap, then how has the city been able to accomplish anything in the near 50 years since its inception.  Why is KCK not a thriving business center, and why did it take until the late 80's for JOCO to develop any real serious comptetition?  I can't wait to have a new mayor at the helm, so we can see what happens when ineptitude is replaced with a visionary and business owner.  It would be unfair to put so much pressure on him, but if Sly can step in and knock a Polsinelli location out of the park, it would be an amazing tone setter for hise term.

[aknowledgeableperson]

The e-tax in KC is not a symbol of failure,

It is a failure in that it shows a city unwilling to tax itself like it should, or maybe a city not willing to control its costs.  As pointed out earlier the e-tax brings in 50% more revenue than the property tax and brings in more than the various sales taxes.  And since it is a tax only on wages it does not affect other sources of income of its citizens, such as pensions and investments.
And when I talk about costs, as an example, I found it interesting that the city was talking about a trash fee of $180/year.  Where I live the fee is roughly $140/year with unlimited trash, recycling, and one bulky item pickup every week (just set it out with your trash).

If the city wants to impose the e-tax then it has that right, at least for now the next five years, so more power to it.  But it is an unequitable tax and should become moreso in the future as its citizens age and start drawing retirement income instead of wage income.  And if it is so important to tax wages of "outsiders" than why out of the 150 largest cities in the USA less than half impose this tax (I can't remember the exact number).   

[KCPowercat]

But other cities do use the tax....major cities....and I'm sure other cities want to....

[lock+load]

And if it is so important to tax wages of "outsiders" than why out of the 150 largest cities in the USA less than half impose this tax (I can't remember the exact number).    

Every jurisdiction chooses the best mix of taxes for its situation.  Some states don't have income taxes.  Some areas assess sales tax on food, while others do not.   One size does not fit all.  

[KC-wildcat]

And if it is so important to tax wages of "outsiders" than why out of the 150 largest cities in the USA less than half impose this tax (I can't remember the exact number).   

That's just it!  We're not taxing "outsiders."  We're taxing the people who work in Kansas City, MO.  These people are "insiders."  And as these people walk on the sidewalks, drive on the streets, throw trash in the cans, and shit in our toilets, I don't see the inequity in having them contribute some $$$ to help keep these things in working order. 

[bobbyhawks]

It is a failure in that it shows a city unwilling to tax itself like it should, or maybe a city not willing to control its costs. 

Tax itself like it should?  So, is there a chart we can reference that outlines how every city should tax itself?  Every geography, every climate, every varying surface area, every degree of sprawl, to name a few, will lead to a unique situation from a tax perspective.  Added to KC's unique situation is a state line.  People love to throw out the stat that most of 150 cities don't have this tax, but most of 150 cities don't straddle a state line with much of the affluent suburban commuter population choosing to give taxes to another state.

KCMO has a lot of problems.  Nobody is denying that, but simply comparing line A to line B with something like trash does not necessarily tell any kind of story.  Some places don't have any urban areas to collect trash from.  Some places have only urban areas to collect trash from.  Some places like KCMO, have urban areas, near countrified areas, the 12th largest area in the country, the 40th largest population in the country, and a population of lower economic status individuals who were left behind by those fleeing to outer reaches of suburbs in other municipalities.  KCMO is different, and as said 1000 times, if you have already chosen to live elsewhere, there is nothing but your reliance on the city or a job that relys on the city to keep you from avoiding this 1% tax.

[aknowledgeableperson]

My comments are not unique:

Mayor-elect Sly James — who enthusiastically campaigned for the e-tax after his election on March 22 — must strive to make sure the city wisely uses public funds to keep the confidence of its citizens in the future.

That’s why he keeps talking about a citizens commission to review the city’s finances. And about putting in place programs to measure how well the city delivers its services in an attempt to boost performance by the city staff. Both are good ideas, and the new City Council should embrace them.

James ought to make sure the police and fire departments are included in the first wave of this efficiency program.

On the police side, there’s still a need to consolidate more functions with City Hall and to reduce health care insurance costs. On the fire side, the city has an incredible opportunity to shrink the size of the bloated firefighting force, even as the agency improves the emergency medical care it now delivers with the great majority of its calls.

So you don't think this is something the new mayor shouldn't do?

[bobbyhawks]

My comments are not unique:

So you don't think this is something the new mayor shouldn't do?

There is a ridiculous amount of room for improvement in how things are spent in KC.  That is a completely different argument from how that pool of money should be collected.  And taking a big chunk of money away is not the only way to become more efficient.

As an aside, I love how tea party enthusiasts somehow have a monopoly on patriotism, yet they are also the only ones allowed to say damning things about how our government is run, who is running our government, that government is not capable of doing things correctly.  They'll judge you without blinking if you say someone in the military is bad or did something wrong, but we can trash all of our teachers, most of our politicians, and all of our city, state, and federal workers until they feel underappreciated and unwanted.  Like it or not, these people are a huge part of our country.  Our country is not some individual's fantasy.  It is an experiment, a collection of many ideals, a constant struggle to find what works; it is 300+ million people and the hopes of billions of people.

[FangKC]

I think the earnings tax is a completely fair way to tax for this reason.

A good deal of the wear and tear on city streets is from people going to and from work. Street maintenance is one of the biggest expenses the City has. This includes not only repair, but widening streets for traffic, traffic lights, replacement of equipment, stormwater facilities, snow removal so people can get to work, etc. It also includes police and fire services for traffic management and accidents during the rush hours. Our city fire department also shows up at traffic accidents.

Workers put more miles on City streets than probably any other user. People who are retired, or don't work, don't have to drive to and from work on City streets, and use them less. So in that way, the earnings tax is a user fee.

Doubling property taxes on in-City residents who don't drive that much to work is also unfair.  And what about a KCMO resident who owns a home, but doesn't drive at all? A lot of their property taxes would go for street maintenance for people who work, and are the primary parties requiring the roads.

So you have a situation where an retired person has their property taxes doubled, who is living on a Social Security check, and probably doesn't drive much, versus workers who are having 1 percent of their work earnings taxed and probably make up 70 percent of daily traffic on roads. I’m just guessing about the worker/traffic thing, but you can’t deny that people commuting to work makes up most of our traffic.

To me, that is completely fair, and a no-brainer.

The other thing about comparing cities that use an earning tax.  Kansas City is probably among them because it's a different animal than most cities. A significant portion of its' workforce lives in another state, and the City is spread across multiple counties with different property and sales tax rates. That makes governing more complex.  For example, a lot of civic burden is carried by Jackson County taxpayers--like transit, and the stadiums that many in the Metro enjoy.

The City cannot recoup state taxes in the form of various incentives, and state highway funds, and such, because about 40 percent of Metro residents/users live in another state, yet many of them use the infastructure, cultural and civic assets of KCMO.  And until very recently, most of the new suburban growth and Metro wealth was in another state.

Another thing, if all 2 million people in the KC Metro lived in Missouri, KCMO would probably get a lot more state money than it does. St. Louis has much more power than KCMO in the State Legislature. We lose clout and revenue because Metro residents live in another state.

Some other cities with earning taxes face similar problems with metro residents living in other states: New York City, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Chicago, Baltimore, Washington DC, Portland, Cincinnati, and Louisville.

Kansas City's earnings tax of 1 percent is low compared to other cities.

NYC -- 2.9% to 3.9%
Washington DC -- The rates are 4% for the first $10,000 of income, 6% for $10,000 to $40,000 of income, and 8.5% for income over $40,000.
Philadelphia -- 3.9%
Gaithersburg, MD -- 3.2%
Baltimore -- 3.05%
Pittsburgh -- 3%
Detroit -- 2.5%
Columbus 2.5%
Louisville -- 2.20%
Cincinnati -- 2.1%
Cleveland -- 2%
Indianapolis -- 1.62%
San Francisco -- 1.5%